This of course is why so many people are adamantly opposed to such quotas. Because if that girl does get her act together in high school, and completes all her coursework through college, then she will get that engineering job, and the less qualified man will not. And many see that as unfair. It is much easier to funnel most of the talented motivated girls to teaching and nursing, so that we have these protected highly paid occupations like engineering
That's the biggest load of brainwashed nazi-feminist bullshit that I've read all day. You can't point to evidence of any widespread conscious undertaking of detraction of women from particular careers to keep job security for men, and if you're going to say it's subconscious, you're going to have a hard time convincing anybody. There's a much more simple, logical reason people oppose quotas.
People oppose quotas because there should never be a situation where the most qualified candidate is denied a job because of their age/sex/race. (Yes, that's the supposed reason for quotas too.) Nobody wants to be told that they were the best person for the job, but they can't have it because they're legally required to take somebody else to fill a quota. Anybody with any level of pride wouldn't want a position when they know they got it because of a quota and not merit.
Sure. At a young age, many girls are steered away from certain career paths. Usually it's by their mother. If you want to fix it, don't make some stupid law that's every bit as prejudicially discriminatory as the practice you're trying to end. Instead, raise your daughter the way you deem appropriate.
Oh, and as an aside, I went to an engineering school for my degree. 70% of the students were men. Every woman that applied was alway accepted unless they were blatantly unqualified, while more qualified male applicants were denied admission due to the limited number of available slots. It sucks seeing good people turned away to make room for a girl who drops out after the first year. The university should have butt out and accepted people based on their qualifications instead of their sex. Their practice, at best, had no effect on the interest of women to apply to the program. At worst it set them up to fail because they didn't feel the need to be prepared for the experience... After all, it was so easy to get in.
As somebody who bought a PowerBook G3 when they came out specifically to play with Yellow Dog Linux on it, my experience was the opposite. Perhaps you just don't like SuSE?
My experience was that Yellow Dog was a half-assed port of RedHat to PPC, and Debian for PPC was Debian. With Yellow Dog you felt like you almost had a working RedHat system, but things were out of date, and many of the things you were used to were unavailable. Debian had none of those problems.
Admittedly, I've not gone back and tried Yellow Dog since 2001, but why would I after that initial experience, and the existence of other high-quality, mainstream options?
For almost 10-years now, Slashdot has pipmped Terra Soft and Yellow Dog. There's Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu, Gentoo, and SuSE (you know, distros people actually use out there) available for the Cell processor and PS3, and Slashdot shills for Terra Soft. This was true back when PPC linux was mildly popular too... Debian, Slackware, SuSE... They all supported it, but Slashdot pimps Yellow Dog. What gives?
If you have hardware that is on the osx86 hardware compatibility list, it really does simply "just work". As in, pop in the DVD, click through the installer, wait 5 minutes for files to copy, reboot. Works.
I'm not sure what you mean by "Contrary to popular belief", 'cause as far as I'm aware popular belief is that it's a lot more difficult than that.
Furthermore, Visual Studio does not run on OS X.
The software you develop in Visual Studio probably only runs on Windows anyway. You should be writing cross-platform software.
And IDEs suck anyway. Having the Best IDE doesn't really fix that.
Show me where I said it's easy. I said that changes are frequently trivial....
Stability doesn't mean the interface never changes. Stability means that interface doesn't change on a whim... That small changes should be rolled up to minimize the frequency of changes. That compatibility changes should be announced well in advance. That two kernels with the same name and version number from multiple distributors provide the same interface... It means that backwards compatibility should be a goal, but not that you can't break it.
"Stable" doesn't mean "supported forever". It means "changes as little as possible".
I'm not sure how you derived the "Solaris kernel engineers are idiots" argument from what I said. Whomever (and I'm sure it wasn't an engineer) decided that maintaining compatibility was more important than fixing a security hole, is an idiot. If breaking compatibility is what you need to do to fix a serious issue, then you break compatibility. If you think I was saying meant that Solaris engineers should have been able to fix the security issue and still maintain compatibility, you need to go back and read what I said again.
To me (to many software developers), stability doesn't mean "backwards compatible forever"... It means a reasonable attempt to maintain compatibility, and a minimum committed duration that a particular interface will be supported.
The attitude you describe does result in cruft, but that attitude has nothing to do with stability.
Announce the intention to break compatibility at least two releases ahead. Roll multiple trivial changes into a single release instead of releasing them at the maintainers fancy. Specify the interface somewhere other than in the code so your third-party distributors can't get away with breaking the interface and calling their kernel "Linux" with the same version number as the upstream edition. That is stability.
The name of that file cleverly describes its contents, even though it is attempting to describe the argument it 'debunks'.
You can have the best of both worlds (a stable API, and the ability to make changes). The fact of the matter is that the APIs don't change all that often, and frequently they change in a way that would allow for a trivial compatibility layer. Te fact of the matter is that it would *benefit* linux to force the developers of the various driver layers to have to consider interface stability when they make their changes. It would benefit the entire community to make it incredibly difficult for distributors *cough*redhat*cough* to change the driver API for a service layer and release the kernel with the same version number.
Summary: A stable API doesn't mean you're weighed down with cruft, and any argument based on that premise is nonsense. Any intelligent person making that argument is really saying that they think all drivers should be GPL.
You got in trouble for that? Man, you manager must have been a total ass...
I also worked at McDonalds in the Arch Deluxe days, and I put that arch sauce on *everything* when I made lunch for myself...
I miss the Deluxe line though... The buns were better... The bacon was better... The sauce was excellent... I don't eat at McDonalds very much since they got rid of them...
It seems to me that says they can use the funds collected to provide for the general welfare of the country... Not that they can use taxes, duties, and excises as a social bludgeon to modify the behavior of individuals or corporations.
It's true that they like to push the platform, but they also have a history of multi-platform releases. FF7, for example, was for the PC and the PlayStation, and the PC version was far superior since it had texture-mapped 3D graphics...
With a Final Fantasy type game, 95+% of the development is content creation. Even if you have to add an additional 5% to your development work, and one of the versions has to have less features, or reduced graphics, why wouldn't you do that for an extra 30-50% larger customer base?
Given the relative sales of the two systems since November, the US market is the only one where the 360 will be "winning" (if second place counts as winning) by the time FF XIII comes out.
Adding an additional 9 million customers (the US install base of the 360) isn't quite doubling their market.
Other than that, your analysis is spot on though. Honestly, any developer that isn't making their content-heavy software to run multi-platform is stupid. That's true for computer software as well as console games. It's easy enough to do that it takes very few sales to justify the effort.
Real USB. Standard DLNA servers. Multiple memory card formats. Third-party codecs. A button to install third-party operating systems (including linux) in the default UI...
The problem is that most good tech workers are actually pretty happy with how they are treated, and understand that a union would protect the people around them that are poor co-workers. There is still a very good job market in the US for quality tech workers.
The people who would benefit from a tech worker union are too lazy to be quality help. What makes you think they're going to get off their ass for anything other than coffee?
We have lots of laws where breaking the law is not a criminal offense. I don't support legalizing jaywalking, but I don't think we should throw people in jail for that either.
Use giganews. It's cheap, complete, has long retention, and it's probably faster than your ISP's news servers. Plus you can use your account on the road as well as at home.
Let your ISP push packets. Their "value-added" services usually suck anyway.
Incidentally, other than getting high and then driving, I don't actually support imprisonment of people who smoke pot. I don't think it should be legalized either, but there's no reason to stick people in jail unless they are a danger to others.
The people who smoke weed and affect only themselves generally get left alone... Nobody even notices they're smoking it.
The people who go to jail because of marijuana generally are driving high, growing and distributing it (people who grow strictly for themselves usually don't get caught either), or smoking in public.
It's possible for you to get high and have no impact on others, but it's also possible for your to get high and be a danger or detriment to society.
It's conceivable that they could buy 20, even 30% of all futures contracts that hit the market. Do you really see global consumption dropping 20-30% due to increasing prices?
The current bubble can maintain itself for 3-4 years before it tops out unless there is some regulatory intervention. Even disasters wouldn't justify the current price. All it can do is provide rationale for irrational buying of an overpriced commodity.
I'm frankly fine with speculators speculating because, frankly, it always ends up with them losing their asses. Commodities will even back out as the markets settle down.
It's pretty generous, I think, to call "cornering the market" "speculating".
They're not simply betting on continued price increases. They're creating continued price increases. They're working with a pile of capital that's bigger than the market.
90 days of oil futures inventory is worth about 810 billion dollars at $150/barrel. Given the tight correlation between supply and demand, controlling 1/10th of the inventory will maintain upward price pressure for a long time. $81 billion is chump change for these guys. Way less than half of what they pulled out of their sub-prime mortgage investments.
Speculation is fine. Cornering the commodities market is extortion.
Don't you mean "if only they could actually run this thing off pig-shit?"
They imply that they're using turkey shit, but then it says "the full output of the turkey processing plant" (That would include flesh, fat, feet, heads, etc..) and "egg production waste". It implies that pig and even human waste could be used, but then says "Much of this mass is considered unsuitable for oil conversion."
I'm guessing the answer to your question is right in your own post..
Only 500 barrels a day. Stinks up a whole town...
Oh, and there's this that you neglected to mention:
In April 2005 the plant was reported to be running at a loss. Further 2005 reports summarized some economic setbacks which the Carthage plant encountered since its planning stages. It was thought that concern over mad cow disease would prevent the use of turkey waste and other animal products as cattle feed, and thus this waste would be free. As it turned out, turkey waste may still be used as feed in the United States, so that the facility must purchase that feed stock at a cost of $30 to $40 per ton, adding $15 to $20 per barrel to the cost of the oil.
Their plan to be profitable was based on the (incorrect) assumption that they would be getting their inputs for free. Now they're turning a profit because of a federal energy subsidy (you're giving them tax money as profit).
Sounds like a complete dead-end. No "big oil" conspiracy theory required.
Slashdot Mirror
This of course is why so many people are adamantly opposed to such quotas. Because if that girl does get her act together in high school, and completes all her coursework through college, then she will get that engineering job, and the less qualified man will not. And many see that as unfair. It is much easier to funnel most of the talented motivated girls to teaching and nursing, so that we have these protected highly paid occupations like engineering
That's the biggest load of brainwashed nazi-feminist bullshit that I've read all day. You can't point to evidence of any widespread conscious undertaking of detraction of women from particular careers to keep job security for men, and if you're going to say it's subconscious, you're going to have a hard time convincing anybody. There's a much more simple, logical reason people oppose quotas.
People oppose quotas because there should never be a situation where the most qualified candidate is denied a job because of their age/sex/race. (Yes, that's the supposed reason for quotas too.) Nobody wants to be told that they were the best person for the job, but they can't have it because they're legally required to take somebody else to fill a quota. Anybody with any level of pride wouldn't want a position when they know they got it because of a quota and not merit.
Sure. At a young age, many girls are steered away from certain career paths. Usually it's by their mother. If you want to fix it, don't make some stupid law that's every bit as prejudicially discriminatory as the practice you're trying to end. Instead, raise your daughter the way you deem appropriate.
Oh, and as an aside, I went to an engineering school for my degree. 70% of the students were men. Every woman that applied was alway accepted unless they were blatantly unqualified, while more qualified male applicants were denied admission due to the limited number of available slots. It sucks seeing good people turned away to make room for a girl who drops out after the first year. The university should have butt out and accepted people based on their qualifications instead of their sex. Their practice, at best, had no effect on the interest of women to apply to the program. At worst it set them up to fail because they didn't feel the need to be prepared for the experience... After all, it was so easy to get in.
As somebody who bought a PowerBook G3 when they came out specifically to play with Yellow Dog Linux on it, my experience was the opposite. Perhaps you just don't like SuSE?
My experience was that Yellow Dog was a half-assed port of RedHat to PPC, and Debian for PPC was Debian. With Yellow Dog you felt like you almost had a working RedHat system, but things were out of date, and many of the things you were used to were unavailable. Debian had none of those problems.
Admittedly, I've not gone back and tried Yellow Dog since 2001, but why would I after that initial experience, and the existence of other high-quality, mainstream options?
For almost 10-years now, Slashdot has pipmped Terra Soft and Yellow Dog. There's Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu, Gentoo, and SuSE (you know, distros people actually use out there) available for the Cell processor and PS3, and Slashdot shills for Terra Soft. This was true back when PPC linux was mildly popular too... Debian, Slackware, SuSE... They all supported it, but Slashdot pimps Yellow Dog. What gives?
...penis creatures?
If you have hardware that is on the osx86 hardware compatibility list, it really does simply "just work". As in, pop in the DVD, click through the installer, wait 5 minutes for files to copy, reboot. Works.
I'm not sure what you mean by "Contrary to popular belief", 'cause as far as I'm aware popular belief is that it's a lot more difficult than that.
Furthermore, Visual Studio does not run on OS X.
The software you develop in Visual Studio probably only runs on Windows anyway. You should be writing cross-platform software.
And IDEs suck anyway. Having the Best IDE doesn't really fix that.
Show me where I said it's easy. I said that changes are frequently trivial....
Stability doesn't mean the interface never changes. Stability means that interface doesn't change on a whim... That small changes should be rolled up to minimize the frequency of changes. That compatibility changes should be announced well in advance. That two kernels with the same name and version number from multiple distributors provide the same interface... It means that backwards compatibility should be a goal, but not that you can't break it.
"Stable" doesn't mean "supported forever". It means "changes as little as possible".
I'm not sure how you derived the "Solaris kernel engineers are idiots" argument from what I said. Whomever (and I'm sure it wasn't an engineer) decided that maintaining compatibility was more important than fixing a security hole, is an idiot. If breaking compatibility is what you need to do to fix a serious issue, then you break compatibility. If you think I was saying meant that Solaris engineers should have been able to fix the security issue and still maintain compatibility, you need to go back and read what I said again.
To me (to many software developers), stability doesn't mean "backwards compatible forever"... It means a reasonable attempt to maintain compatibility, and a minimum committed duration that a particular interface will be supported.
The attitude you describe does result in cruft, but that attitude has nothing to do with stability.
Announce the intention to break compatibility at least two releases ahead. Roll multiple trivial changes into a single release instead of releasing them at the maintainers fancy. Specify the interface somewhere other than in the code so your third-party distributors can't get away with breaking the interface and calling their kernel "Linux" with the same version number as the upstream edition. That is stability.
The name of that file cleverly describes its contents, even though it is attempting to describe the argument it 'debunks'.
You can have the best of both worlds (a stable API, and the ability to make changes). The fact of the matter is that the APIs don't change all that often, and frequently they change in a way that would allow for a trivial compatibility layer. Te fact of the matter is that it would *benefit* linux to force the developers of the various driver layers to have to consider interface stability when they make their changes. It would benefit the entire community to make it incredibly difficult for distributors *cough*redhat*cough* to change the driver API for a service layer and release the kernel with the same version number.
Summary: A stable API doesn't mean you're weighed down with cruft, and any argument based on that premise is nonsense. Any intelligent person making that argument is really saying that they think all drivers should be GPL.
It requires even less effort to install a hacked MacOS 10.5 on your PC than it does to tweak vista.
Really.
You got in trouble for that? Man, you manager must have been a total ass...
I also worked at McDonalds in the Arch Deluxe days, and I put that arch sauce on *everything* when I made lunch for myself...
I miss the Deluxe line though... The buns were better... The bacon was better... The sauce was excellent... I don't eat at McDonalds very much since they got rid of them...
It seems to me that says they can use the funds collected to provide for the general welfare of the country... Not that they can use taxes, duties, and excises as a social bludgeon to modify the behavior of individuals or corporations.
It's true that they like to push the platform, but they also have a history of multi-platform releases. FF7, for example, was for the PC and the PlayStation, and the PC version was far superior since it had texture-mapped 3D graphics...
With a Final Fantasy type game, 95+% of the development is content creation. Even if you have to add an additional 5% to your development work, and one of the versions has to have less features, or reduced graphics, why wouldn't you do that for an extra 30-50% larger customer base?
Given the relative sales of the two systems since November, the US market is the only one where the 360 will be "winning" (if second place counts as winning) by the time FF XIII comes out.
Adding an additional 9 million customers (the US install base of the 360) isn't quite doubling their market.
Other than that, your analysis is spot on though. Honestly, any developer that isn't making their content-heavy software to run multi-platform is stupid. That's true for computer software as well as console games. It's easy enough to do that it takes very few sales to justify the effort.
It's funny you should say that.
On several occasions, a high end, overpowered video card is exactly what my wife has been looking for.
One?
Real USB. Standard DLNA servers. Multiple memory card formats. Third-party codecs. A button to install third-party operating systems (including linux) in the default UI...
Sure... One...
The problem is that most good tech workers are actually pretty happy with how they are treated, and understand that a union would protect the people around them that are poor co-workers. There is still a very good job market in the US for quality tech workers.
The people who would benefit from a tech worker union are too lazy to be quality help. What makes you think they're going to get off their ass for anything other than coffee?
We have lots of laws where breaking the law is not a criminal offense. I don't support legalizing jaywalking, but I don't think we should throw people in jail for that either.
Use giganews. It's cheap, complete, has long retention, and it's probably faster than your ISP's news servers. Plus you can use your account on the road as well as at home.
Let your ISP push packets. Their "value-added" services usually suck anyway.
Incidentally, other than getting high and then driving, I don't actually support imprisonment of people who smoke pot. I don't think it should be legalized either, but there's no reason to stick people in jail unless they are a danger to others.
The people who smoke weed and affect only themselves generally get left alone... Nobody even notices they're smoking it.
The people who go to jail because of marijuana generally are driving high, growing and distributing it (people who grow strictly for themselves usually don't get caught either), or smoking in public.
It's possible for you to get high and have no impact on others, but it's also possible for your to get high and be a danger or detriment to society.
It's conceivable that they could buy 20, even 30% of all futures contracts that hit the market. Do you really see global consumption dropping 20-30% due to increasing prices?
The current bubble can maintain itself for 3-4 years before it tops out unless there is some regulatory intervention. Even disasters wouldn't justify the current price. All it can do is provide rationale for irrational buying of an overpriced commodity.
I'm frankly fine with speculators speculating because, frankly, it always ends up with them losing their asses. Commodities will even back out as the markets settle down.
It's pretty generous, I think, to call "cornering the market" "speculating".
They're not simply betting on continued price increases. They're creating continued price increases. They're working with a pile of capital that's bigger than the market.
90 days of oil futures inventory is worth about 810 billion dollars at $150/barrel. Given the tight correlation between supply and demand, controlling 1/10th of the inventory will maintain upward price pressure for a long time. $81 billion is chump change for these guys. Way less than half of what they pulled out of their sub-prime mortgage investments.
Speculation is fine. Cornering the commodities market is extortion.
Don't you mean "if only they could actually run this thing off pig-shit?"
They imply that they're using turkey shit, but then it says "the full output of the turkey processing plant" (That would include flesh, fat, feet, heads, etc..) and "egg production waste". It implies that pig and even human waste could be used, but then says "Much of this mass is considered unsuitable for oil conversion."
I'm guessing the answer to your question is right in your own post..
Only 500 barrels a day. Stinks up a whole town...
Oh, and there's this that you neglected to mention:
In April 2005 the plant was reported to be running at a loss. Further 2005 reports summarized some economic setbacks which the Carthage plant encountered since its planning stages. It was thought that concern over mad cow disease would prevent the use of turkey waste and other animal products as cattle feed, and thus this waste would be free. As it turned out, turkey waste may still be used as feed in the United States, so that the facility must purchase that feed stock at a cost of $30 to $40 per ton, adding $15 to $20 per barrel to the cost of the oil.
Their plan to be profitable was based on the (incorrect) assumption that they would be getting their inputs for free. Now they're turning a profit because of a federal energy subsidy (you're giving them tax money as profit).
Sounds like a complete dead-end. No "big oil" conspiracy theory required.